Non-Malleable Time-Lock Puzzles and Applications

Time-lock puzzles are a mechanism for sending messages to the future , by allowing a sender to quickly generate a puzzle with an underlying message that remains hidden until a receiver spends a moderately large amount of time solving it. We introduce and construct a variant of a time-lock puzzle which is non-malleable, which roughly guarantees that it is impossible to maul a puzzle into one for a related message without solving it. Using non-malleable time-lock puzzles, we achieve the following applications: (1) The first fair non-interactive multi-party protocols for coin flipping and auctions in the plain model without setup. (2) Practically efficient fair multi-party protocols for coin flipping and auctions proven secure in the (auxiliary-input) random oracle model. As a key step towards proving the security of our protocols, we introduce the notion of functional non-malleability, which protects against tampering attacks that affect a specific function of the related messages. To support an unbounded number of participants in our protocols, our time-lock puzzles satisfy functional non-malleability in the fully concurrent setting. We additionally show that standard (non-functional) non-malleability is impossible to achieve in the concurrent setting (even in the random oracle model)

TARDIS: A Foundation of Time-Lock Puzzles in UC

Time-based primitives like time-lock puzzles (TLP) are finding widespread use in practical protocols, partially due to the surge of interest in the blockchain space where TLPs and related primitives are perceived to solve many problems. Unfortunately, the security claims are often shaky or plainly wrong since these primitives are used under composition. One reason is that TLPs are inherently not UC secure and time is tricky to model and use in the UC model. On the other hand, just specifying standalone notions of the intended task, left alone correctly using standalone notions like non-malleable TLPs only, might be hard or impossible for the given task. And even when possible a standalone secure primitive is harder to apply securely in practice afterwards as its behavior under composition is unclear. The ideal solution would be a model of TLPs in the UC framework to allow simple modular proofs. In this paper we provide a foundation for proving composable security of practical protocols using time-lock puzzles and related timed primitives in the UC model. We construct UC-secure TLPs based on random oracles and show that using random oracles is necessary. In order to prove security, we provide a simple and abstract way to reason about time in UC protocols. Finally, we demonstrate the usefulness of this foundation by constructing applications that are interesting in their own right, such as UC-secure two-party computation with output-independent abort

Foundations, Properties, and Security Applications of Puzzles: A Survey

Cryptographic algorithms have been used not only to create robust ciphertexts but also to generate cryptograms that, contrary to the classic goal of cryptography, are meant to be broken. These cryptograms, generally called puzzles, require the use of a certain amount of resources to be solved, hence introducing a cost that is often regarded as a time delay---though it could involve other metrics as well, such as bandwidth. These powerful features have made puzzles the core of many security protocols, acquiring increasing importance in the IT security landscape. The concept of a puzzle has subsequently been extended to other types of schemes that do not use cryptographic functions, such as CAPTCHAs, which are used to discriminate humans from machines. Overall, puzzles have experienced a renewed interest with the advent of Bitcoin, which uses a CPU-intensive puzzle as proof of work. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive study of the most important puzzle construction schemes available in the literature, categorizing them according to several attributes, such as resource type, verification type, and applications. We have redefined the term puzzle by collecting and integrating the scattered notions used in different works, to cover all the existing applications. Moreover, we provide an overview of the possible applications, identifying key requirements and different design approaches. Finally, we highlight the features and limitations of each approach, providing a useful guide for the future development of new puzzle schemes.Comment: This article has been accepted for publication in ACM Computing Survey

Non-Malleable Codes for Bounded Polynomial-Depth Tampering

Non-malleable codes allow one to encode data in such a way that, after tampering, the modified codeword is guaranteed to decode to either the original message, or a completely unrelated one. Since the introduction of the notion by Dziembowski, Pietrzak, and Wichs (ICS \u2710 and J. ACM \u2718), a large body of work has focused on realizing such coding schemes secure against various classes of tampering functions. It is well known that there is no efficient non-malleable code secure against all polynomial size tampering functions. Nevertheless, non-malleable codes in the plain model (i.e., no trusted setup) secure against $\textit{bounded}$ polynomial size tampering are not known and obtaining such a code has been a major open problem. We present the first construction of a non-malleable code secure against $\textit{all}$ polynomial size tampering functions that have $\textit{bounded polynomial depth}$. This is an even larger class than all bounded polynomial $\textit{size}$ functions and, in particular, we capture all functions in non-uniform $\mathbf{NC}$ (and much more). Our construction is in the plain model (i.e., no trusted setup) and relies on several cryptographic assumptions such as keyless hash functions, time-lock puzzles, as well as other standard assumptions. Additionally, our construction has several appealing properties: the complexity of encoding is independent of the class of tampering functions and we obtain sub-exponentially small error

On the Security of Time-Lock Puzzles and Timed Commitments

Time-lock puzzles---problems whose solution requires some amount of sequential effort---have recently received increased interest (e.g., in the context of verifiable delay functions). Most constructions rely on the sequential-squaring conjecture that computing $g^{2^T} \bmod N$ for a uniform $g$ requires at least $T$ (sequential) steps. We study the security of time-lock primitives from two perspectives: - We give the first hardness result about the sequential-squaring conjecture in a non-generic model. Namely, in a quantitative version of the algebraic group model (AGM) that we call the strong AGM, we show that speeding up sequential squaring is as hard as factoring $N$. - We then focus on timed commitments, one of the most important primitives that can be obtained from time-lock puzzles. We extend existing security definitions to settings that may arise when using timed commitments in higher-level protocols, and give the first construction of non-malleable timed commitments. As a building block of independent interest, we also define (and give constructions for) a related primitive called timed public-key encryption

Limits to Non-Malleability

There have been many successes in constructing explicit non-malleable codes for various classes of tampering functions in recent years, and strong existential results are also known. In this work we ask the following question: When can we rule out the existence of a non-malleable code for a tampering class ?? First, we start with some classes where positive results are well-known, and show that when these classes are extended in a natural way, non-malleable codes are no longer possible. Specifically, we show that no non-malleable codes exist for any of the following tampering classes: - Functions that change d/2 symbols, where d is the distance of the code; - Functions where each input symbol affects only a single output symbol; - Functions where each of the n output bits is a function of n-log n input bits. Furthermore, we rule out constructions of non-malleable codes for certain classes ? via reductions to the assumption that a distributional problem is hard for ?, that make black-box use of the tampering functions in the proof. In particular, this yields concrete obstacles for the construction of efficient codes for NC, even assuming average-case variants of P ? NC

Standard Model Time-Lock Puzzles: Defining Security and Constructing via Composition

The introduction of time-lock puzzles initiated the study of publicly “sending information into the future.” For time-lock puzzles, the underlying security-enabling mechanism is the computational complexity of the operations needed to solve the puzzle, which must be tunable to reveal the solution after a predetermined time, and not before that time. Time-lock puzzles are typically constructed via a commitment to a secret, paired with a reveal algorithm that sequentially iterates a basic function over such commitment. One then shows that short-cutting the iterative process violates cryptographic hardness of an underlying problem. To date, and for more than twenty-five years, research on time-lock puzzles relied heavily on iteratively applying well-structured algebraic functions. However, despite the tradition of cryptography to reason about primitives in a realistic model with standard hardness assumptions (often after initial idealized assumptions), most analysis of time-lock puzzles to date still relies on cryptography modeled (in an ideal manner) as a random oracle function or a generic group function. Moreover, Mahmoody et al. showed that time-lock puzzles with superpolynomial gap cannot be constructed from random-oracles; yet still, current treatments generally use an algebraic trapdoor to efficiently construct a puzzle with a large time gap, and then apply the inconsistent (with respect to Mahmoody et al.) random-oracle idealizations to analyze the solving process. Finally, little attention has been paid to the nuances of composing multi-party computation with timed puzzles that are solved as part of the protocol. In this work, we initiate a study of time-lock puzzles in a model built upon a realistic (and falsifiable) computational framework. We present a new formal definition of residual complexity to characterize a realistic, gradual time-release for time-lock puzzles. We also present a general definition of timed multi-party computation (MPC) and both sequential and concurrent composition theorems for MPC in our model

One-Message Zero Knowledge and Non-Malleable Commitments

We introduce a new notion of one-message zero-knowledge (1ZK) arguments that satisfy a weak soundness guarantee — the number of false statements that a polynomial-time non-uniform adversary can convince the verifier to accept is not much larger than the size of its non-uniform advice. The zero-knowledge guarantee is given by a simulator that runs in (mildly) super-polynomial time. We construct such 1ZK arguments based on the notion of multi-collision-resistant keyless hash functions, recently introduced by Bitansky, Kalai, and Paneth (STOC 2018). Relying on the constructed 1ZK arguments, subexponentially-secure time-lock puzzles, and other standard assumptions, we construct one-message fully-concurrent non-malleable commitments. This is the first construction that is based on assumptions that do not already incorporate non-malleability, as well as the first based on (subexponentially) falsifiable assumptions

Versatile and Sustainable Timed-Release Encryption and Sequential Time-Lock Puzzles

Timed-release encryption (TRE) makes it possible to send information ``into the future\u27\u27 such that a pre-determined amount of time needs to pass before the information can be decrypted, which has found numerous applications. The most prominent construction is based on sequential squaring in RSA groups, proposed by Rivest et al. in 1996. Malavolta and Thyagarajan (CRYPTO\u2719) recently proposed an interesting variant of TRE called homomorphic time-lock puzzles (HTLPs). Here one considers multiple puzzles which can be independently generated by different entities. One can homomorphically evaluate a circuit over these puzzles to obtain a new puzzle. Solving this new puzzle yields the output of a circuit evaluated on all solutions of the original puzzles. While this is an interesting concept and enables various new applications, for constructions under standard assumptions one has to rely on sequential squaring. We observe that viewing HTLPs as homomorphic TRE gives rise to a simple generic construction that avoids the homomorphic evaluation on the puzzles and thus the restriction of relying on sequential squaring. It can be instantiated based on any TLP, such as those based on one-way functions and the LWE assumption (via randomized encodings), while providing essentially the same functionality for applications. Moreover, it overcomes the limitation of the approach of Malavolta and Thyagarajan that, despite the homomorphism, one puzzle needs to be solved per decrypted ciphertext. Hence, we obtain a ``solve one, get many for free\u27\u27 property for an arbitrary amount of encrypted data, as we only need to solve a single puzzle independent of the number of ciphertexts. In addition, we introduce the notion of incremental TLPs as a particularly useful generalization of TLPs, which yields particularly practical (homomorphic) TRE schemes. Finally, we demonstrate various applications by firstly showcasing their cryptographic application to construct dual variants of timed-release functional encryption and also show that we can instantiate previous applications of HTLPs in a simpler and more efficient way